Jonah Criswell PREDICTS!

Roy went spelunking in the Corner, and found the Troglodytes-in-Residence giggling about the prospects of Democrats catching a case of teh ghey at the upcoming GLBT debate.  Jonah Goldberg, however, rose above the inherent ickiness of the subject matter to speculate on how the leading intellectuals of blogosphere might react, thus elevating the discourse from a primary school level to the more appropriate standards of junior high, when homosexual panic traditionally reaches its zenith:

Not that I’m endorsing it, but how long until some blogger photoshops the Dem candidates into the guys from the Village People? I say it happens by lunchtime, if it hasn’t already.

Say what you want about the man’s politics, or intelligence, or bookshelves full of hollowed-out reference volumes stuffed with Dolly Madison Zingers…you gotta admit, he’s a visionary:

UPDATE:  Norbiz discusses the likelihood of an attack by Orcs now that “stomach-Kreskin” Michael Chertoff has acquired a plantir!

Posted by scott on Wednesday, July 11th, 2007 at 3:37 pm.

14 Responses to “Jonah Criswell PREDICTS!”

Heh, I like how his face is all pinky. I see him wagging his hammer like Jeff Bridges in The Big Lebowski, dancing to the tune of What Condition My Condition Was In…..

Left by BeginningToWonder on July 11th, 2007

The Stossel is a nice touch. Eeew, I meant that figuratively.

Left by D. Sidhe on July 11th, 2007

“The Stossel Touch”…turns everything into bullshit.

Left by Bill S on July 11th, 2007

You know that Jonah would have done the Photoshopping himself, except that his ghostwriter was too busy trying to finish the manuscript of Jonah’s book.

Left by Zeno on July 11th, 2007

Stossel? Wha? Lemme look at that pic again…Holy Smokes! I didn’t even notice John Stossel there, he just blends in and fits into the pic so naturally. Now I love this Photoshop even MORE! It’s like a “Where’s Waldo”, thing: “Where’s Stossel?”

Left by maryc on July 11th, 2007

Just read in the local fishwrapper (L. A. Times, yestiddy, I think) that Victor Willis, the cop, is hitting the road again (touring, he hasn’t been evicted, though maybe he was so close to eviction he figured he’d better try to grub up some $$$).
Perhaps J. Jonah Goldberg, w/ his current goatee, & perpetual pantload, can go along as the token bear in the band.

Left by M. Bouffant on July 11th, 2007

Palantir.
What? Don’t look at me like that.

Left by Sandals on July 12th, 2007

Or planter.

Left by M. Bouffant on July 12th, 2007

J. Jonah’s bio from the L. A. Times website:
“Jonah Goldberg is one of the most prominent young conservative journalists on the scene today. His column, syndicated by Tribune Media Services, offers shrewd analysis on a wide range of subjects, from political philosophy and economic trends to popular culture, with an entertaining writing style that speaks to a whole new generation.
With keen wit and hard-hitting insight, Goldberg brings a fresh perspective to the typical right-left debate, by rejecting party lines, talking points and stale clichés. He is the 2001 winner of the prestigious Lowell Thomas Award.
Goldberg’s columns and articles have rapidly generated a large readership. A member of the USA Today Board of Contributors, Goldberg is a contributing editor for National Review and founding editor of “National Review Online,” for which he writes a popular feature, “The Goldberg File.” He is a former columnist and contributing editor for Brill’s Content and former media critic for The American Enterprise. He also served as Washington columnist for the Times of London. Goldberg has written about politics and culture for the New Yorker, the Wall Street Journal, Commentary, the Public Interest, the Wilson Quarterly, the Weekly Standard, Slate, TheStreet.com, New York Post, Women’s Quarterly and Food and Wine.
Goldberg has appeared on “Good Morning America,” “Larry King Live,” “Today,” “Nightline,” “Hardball with Chris Matthews,” “Politically Incorrect,” “Special Report with Brit Hume,” “Geraldo,” “NBC Nightly News” and numerous other television and radio programs. He was senior producer of the award-winning series “Think Tank with Ben Wattenberg” on PBS.”
“Shrewd analysis.” “Speaks to a whole new generation.” Bio written by an intern in the P. R. Dep’t.
But I would love to see what he’s written for “Food & Wine.” Something along the lines of which screw-top wines go best w/ which delicious snack foods, I’m sure, to suck that “whole new generation” into the Food and Wine orbit. Yum!

Left by M. Bouffant on July 12th, 2007

“Red or White Cranberry Juice With Pizza Rolls? Snobbery’s Not Just For Oenophiles Anymore”.

Left by D. Sidhe on July 12th, 2007

Hm. If you Photoshop in a photo of Hillary onto the Village People, does that make her gay, or straighter?

Left by actor212 on July 12th, 2007

Not that I’m endorsing it, but how long until a blogger photoshops Jonah Goldberg’s mother’s ass onto his face.
Oh, wait….

Left by bdr on July 12th, 2007

BDR,
How would you prove it?

Left by actor212 on July 12th, 2007

Now I love this Photoshop even MORE! It’s like a “Where’s Waldo”, thing: “Where’s Stossel?”

But, really, mary–would anyone want to find him? (Sadly, No!)

Left by Marq on July 13th, 2007

Jonah Sez: Bush Is Two-Faced. But One Of His Faces Would Never Lie To Me!

UPDATED Below
As a quick Google search shows, Jonah Goldberg spent much of 2004 declaring that no falsehood could ever pass the pink and oh-so-kissable portal of Bush’s lips, while simultaneously declaring that the tongues of Howard Dean, John Kerry, and Joseph Wilson lay like raisins in the bottom of their mouths, shriveled by deceit.

Now alas, Jonah has come to the conclusion that while George Bush was George Washington when it came to claims about Iraq’s thriving nuclear arms industry, he’s Baron von Munchausen when it comes to brown people wriggling through the gaps in our border security.  And it hurts, man.  It really hurts!

How have people who oppose illegal immigration allowed themselves to be painted as both anti-immigration and, more absurdly, “anti-immigrant?”
Liberals and — dismayingly — many “pro-immigration” conservatives will tell you it’s because the “anti-immigration” right is racist, nativist, hate-filled and the like.  That’s basically President Bush’s view….There’s a reason so many people claim that conservatives speak in “code” about immigration. It’s because so few prominent Republicans or conservatives are actually saying anything objectively racist.

Bush is actually willing to fib about his political opponents in order to cast them in a negative light and advance his own agenda?  Jonah nearly choked on his Ho-Ho.  And it’s all the more unfair because it’s so untrue!  Yes, Jonah opposes immigration from Mexico, but only because “that’s where the problem is.”  He certainly doesn’t object to the current influx on the basis of race, merely national origin.  After all, as Jonah says:

Philosophically and politically, I am on the side of every pro-immigration movement of the last two centuries. We’re a better country because of previous waves of immigrants.

I don’t see how you can more thoroughly debunk accusations of anti-Latino bias than by noting that you retroactively approve of all the white people who arrived here a hundred years ago.  Even the Italians.
Still, as painful as these baseless slurs may be, they can’t prevent Jonah from doing what he does best – argument by tautology:

Whether you agree with them or not, most “anti-immigration” conservatives actually think that there is an important distinction between legal and illegal immigration. Want a hint as to why? One is legal and the other isn’t.

and for dessert:

The most important immigration policy is to enforce the policy

But even the chance to chuck a little rhetorical chin music doesn’t take the sting out of your Commander in Chief calling you a bigot.  And so fluently!  One would almost think Bush had lied before, if we didn’t have Jonah’s own testimony to the contrary:

For Bush to have lied, he had to have known that there were no WMDs, right? It’s not a lie unless you know the truth. If you say something you think is true that later turns out to be false, we don’t call that a “lie,” we call that a “mistake.”…But nobody has made a remotely persuasive case that Bush lied. – Jan 16, 2004
The Democrats deeply deranged by anti-Bush fever insist on making the most damning – and implausible – charge possible: that Bush willfully lied to the American people about Iraq.  As I’ve tried to demonstrate in this space before, the idea that the president lied to the American people hinges on – at least – one almost impossible fact: that George W. Bush knew for a certainty that the intelligence agencies of America, Britain, France, Germany, Israel, Australia, as well as the United Nations and countless independent experts were all wrong.   Virtually all of the anti-Bush conspiracy theories – most of which contradict each other – depend on the “Bush lied” thesis. But Bush’s critics won’t let go of this idea, disqualifying themselves from the deadly serious task of dealing with what went wrong.  – January 18, 2004

Bush “lied” because he believed the same intelligence John Kerry believed. Bush “lied” even though John Edwards called the threat from Iraq “imminent” — something Bush never did. No one bothers to ask how it could be possible that Bush lied.  How could he have known there were no WMDs? — Oct. 8, 2005

As it turned out, Wilson’s accusation that President Bush lied in his State of the Union speech about Iraq seeking “yellowcake uranium” was debunked by the Senate Intelligence Committee. — September 6, 2006

Those were the days.  And of course, you can still trust Mr. Bush’s veracity when he speaks about Iraq.  But when the topic turns to immigration reform, suddenly the air is filled a nose-crinkling whiff of burning leg hair, as the Presidential Pants spontaneously combust:

The White House says it cares about enforcement, but Bush’s credibility — indeed all of Washington’s credibility — on illegal immigration is simply nonexistent.

Well, at least now Jonah knows how Philippe felt in The Fallen Idol.
UPDATE.  In comments, Doghouse Riley helps Jonah put the whole painful ordeal into a bit of historical perpective:

Hey, in fairness, I can’t begin to count the number of times Jonah has expressed his admiration for the United States’ steadfast refusal in 1939 to allow the nine hundred German Jews aboard the St. Louis to enter the country in violation of immigration quotas, despite the fact they all wound up back in Germany. After all, there’s legal and then there’s illegal.

Posted by scott on Tuesday, June 5th, 2007 at 5:31 pm.

11 Responses to “Jonah Sez: Bush Is Two-Faced. But One Of His Faces Would Never Lie To Me!”
 

Philosophically and politically, I am on the side of every pro-immigration movement of the last two centuries. We’re a better country because of previous waves of immigrants.
I don’t see how you can more thoroughly debunk accusations of anti-Latino bias than by noting that you retroactively approve of all the white people who arrived here a hundred years ago. Even the Italians.
*PHWEEEEEET*
Two minutes for unintentional neglect!
You’ll notice he approved of slavery by not discounting it in his statement.

Left by actor212 on June 5th, 2007

Hey, in fairness, I can’t begin to count the number of times Jonah has expressed his admiration for the United States’ steadfast refusal in 1939 to allow the nine hundred German Jews aboard the St. Louis to enter the country in violation of immigration quotas, despite the fact they all wound up back in Germany. After all, there’s legal and then there’s illegal.

Left by Doghouse Riley on June 5th, 2007

I so want to be you when I grow up.

Left by scott on June 5th, 2007

Don’t we all.

Left by D. Sidhe on June 6th, 2007

It just infuriates me that this guy has a job as a commentator.
I mean, look at this:
“So how did Republicans, who normally embrace patriotism, American exceptionalism and rugged individualism, get on the wrong side of this story?”
Uh… maybe because those ideas have often historically been rooted in racist ideologies?
I dunno… I feel like a professional thinker should have more perspective then me, a 23 year old community college dropout with only a middling interest in history. Is that so much to ask?

Left by Christopher on June 7th, 2007

Its not a lie, its a mistake? What about willful mistakes?
Here’s the difference between them- one is willful.

Left by Lynn on June 7th, 2007

It’s become a proven technique for thoughtless jerks like Goldberg to snow the reader with so many right-wing factoids, bromides and Hannitudes that there are just too many falsehoods and bamboozlements to rectify in one lifetime. So here’s just one answer for him — the intelligence Bush got from the CIA (not Feith/Cheney) did not make the case for WMDs. And those inspectors who were indeed in Iraq (whom Mitt Romney doesn’t even allow to have existed) were sending back daily reports of finding no WMDs — as in none — calling American lists indentifying WMD cache locations “garbage” right up to the minute President Liberal pulled them out in order to invade and disarm the country of what they had not got.
It’s a fascinating exercise these days to actually live through history that these people so shamefacedly lie about, as if we have neither TV sets nor memory neurons.

Left by R. Porrofatto on June 7th, 2007

Mr. Goldberg is a truely stupid person with a good vocabulary. He ought to be using the ALL !!! CAPS!! and exclamation points his readers prefer.
!!!This PROOVES (!!) ALL LIBS !!! R TRATIORS!!!

Left by Kathy on June 7th, 2007

Domo arigato, R Porrofatto:
[sorry, couldn't resist]
Your post got me thinking about the slick marketing of this war, which was done in similar fashion by the White House & Pentagon–endless barrage of factoids, bamboozlements, etc. designed to create impressions that didn’t quite fit with reality.
And when things started to go into the shitter, the President’s denials regarding what he had promised sounded an awful lot like those of a used car dealer when the clunker you bought drops its tranny in the middle of the expressway during rush hour in 95 degree weather.

Left by trashfire on June 7th, 2007

drops its tranny in the middle of the expressway during rush hour in 95 degree weather.
When Ann Coulter learns not to get into heated arguments with the driver, she’ll be able to hitchhike with some expectation of reaching her destination.

Left by Mentis Fugit on June 7th, 2007

There are people on the far side of the Moon. Little green Rastafarian people to be exact, with moon-dreads. I swear. And they’re terrorist Looney-rastas, of this I’m certain, so it is incumbent upon us, mah fellow Americans, to nuke the Moon now!
By JG’s daffy criterion – “It’s not a lie unless you know the truth” – I haven’t lied, because, what, you think I can breathe vacuum? So I can’t possibly know the truth, right?

Left by W. Kiernan on June 11th, 2007

Bush Beaten by Drunken Beauty Queen

Those who discouraged Lucianne Goldberg from paying her son’s tuition at Goucher College, observing that Jonah was too stupid to paper train, let alone to complete an undergraduate degree, were forced to retract at least the first part of their indictment this morning, when Jonah squatted Sumo wrestler-style over the Op-Ed pages and grunted out another steamy pile of ruminations.

AMERICANS ARE torn between two irreconcilable positions on the Iraq war. Some want the war to be a success — variously defined — and some want the war to be over. Conservatives are basically, but not exclusively, in the “success” camp. Liberals (and those further to the left) are basically, but not exclusively, the “over” party. And many people are suffering profound cognitive dissonance by trying to believe these two positions can be held simultaneously.

While Jonah seems to be the one suffering from cognitive dissonance, I have some good news: it’s far from profound.  Even better news, Americans aren’t “torn between two irreconcilable positions on the Iraq war” at all.  In fact, Bush has done a near Rooseveltian job of uniting our once fractured country, since 70% of oppose escalation of troop levels, and only 35% still believe we were right to invade Iraq in the first place.  (Normally, at this point I would suggest that we just call the rest of the column on account of lame, but Jonah has 650 words to go, and 2 teaspoons of Metamucil to process, so all I can say is:  I hope you brought a magazine.)

With last night’s speech, President Bush made it clear that he will settle for nothing less than winning it. He may be deluding himself, and his plan may not work, but he at least has done the nation the courtesy of saying what his position is, despite an antagonistic political establishment and a hostile public.

So Jonah’s position is that we ought to respect Bush because at least he has the courage to lie to our faces.  To me, that smacks less of fortitude and more of sociopathy, but what I find truly amazing about this column is the implication that Bush’s fantasies about Iraq are morally superior to the Democrats’ realistic assessment of this debacle, because in Bush’s dreams we get to win.  Take the title of the piece (ordinarily I don’t hold writers liable for the headlines editors slap onto their work, but this one seems to pretty accurately reflect the contents):

So one’s ethical standing is determined by the content of one’s Little Nemo in Slumberland-like dreams, no matter how surreal.  Okay, but according to Jonah’s logic, Bush is morally dwarfed by Miss USA, because while they both share a drinking problem, Bush would be satisfied with stability in Iraq, whereas Miss USA wants world peace.

 What is maddening is that the Democratic leadership cannot, or will not, clearly tell the American people whether they are the party of “end it” or “win it.” 

Yes.  Take the sense of the Senate resolution opposing the dispatch of additional troops to Iraq — what the hell is Jonah supposed to make of that?  It’s like these people are speaking in code, or something!  Now, I’m not one to bleg, but I urge everyone to send the labels from their jars of rich, chocolately Ovaltine to NRO, so Jonah can get the secret decoder ring that will allow him to translate Nancy Pelosi’s encrypted press releases.

On the one hand, they tell the president that they want this war “brought to a close.” On the other, they refuse to use their power of the purse to do exactly that, opting instead for a symbolic resolution. It may be the wisest political course for them, but it does a disservice to the nation by making the Iraq debate the equivalent of boxing with fog. 

Yeah, it’s almost like they don’t want to let concern trolls goad them into passing a law that Bush will effortlessly circumvent through simple accounting tricks, but which would allow the Republicans to relentlessly mau mau the Democrats for starving the troops.
Sorry, Jonah.  Your arms too short to box with fog.

Here we have a president forthrightly trying to win a war, and the opposition — which not long ago was in favor of increasing troops, when Bush was against that — won’t say what it wants. This is flatly immoral.

Okay. This is where Jonah stops being an amusing mediocrity and suddenly becomes creepy and loathsome, morphing before our eyes from Kato Kaelin into O.J. Simpson. The Democrats’ opposition to the war is “flatly immoral,” because it hasn’t been couched in the exact combination of magic words acceptable to Jonah. Evidently they need to say “bring our troops home” in Klingonese, or Elvish, or three times in a row while gazing into a mirror. But what Bush is doing — throwing 21,000 more troops into harms way in the hope that if we give the insurgents enough Americans to shoot, eventually they’ll run out of bullets — is a “forthright” effort to “win a war?”

I’ve long thought that Jonah was as intellectually lazy as the Presidential meal ticket to which he clung with limpet-like tenacity , but even I don’t think he’s that stupid. Which means he knows that there is no “surge” of troops in the offing. There’s a trickle of exhausted, overstressed forces that Bush will whizz randomly over Iraq like a drunk signing a snowbank with his own urine. And these additional lives, as well as the lives of all the other U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians will be pissed away so that Bush can run out the clock, until the the whole issue is so immersed in the sturm und drang of the 2008 elections that nobody even wants him to take action on Iraq anymore.

Bush is “deluding himself” to a degree not seen since the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Except the President is not personally getting hacked to pieces – the dismembered knight is simply his employee, so it’s fairly easy for Bush to declare “It’s just a flesh wound!” each time blood geysers from a rudely truncated stump. As long as there are servicemen and women to take bullets on his behalf, Bush won’t be forced to take his medicine — not even the St. Joseph’s flavored baby aspirin served up our cooing and solicitous press corps. Call it Black-Knight-by-Proxy Syndrome.

Another Democratic dodge is the incessant demand for a “political solution” in Iraq. “What is absolutely clear to me is there is no military solution to the problems in Iraq, that only political solutions are going to bring about some semblance of peace,” Sen. Barack Obama declared. This is either childishly naive or reprehensibly dishonest.

To concede that four years after our invasion we have nothing to show for it but blood and anarchy, and to suggest that our only hope of salvation lies in reversing course and talking to Syria, Iran, Sunnis, Shi’ites, Kurds and any other interested parties is ”flatly immoral” and “reprehensibly dishonest”?  You know, there came a point where white people were no longer allowed to use the N-word in decent company.  At what point will people like Jonah be forbidden to deploy the language of moral outrage, on pain of being frogmarched out of the dinner party?

Saying we need a political solution is as helpful as saying “give peace a chance.” Peace requires more than such pie-eyed verbiage. In the real world, peace has no chance until the people who want to give death squads another shot have been dispatched from the scene.

The fact that Jonah’s side was funding death squads in Central America during the Reagan Administration only proves his point, since once they were dispatched from the scene, peace did indeed prevail.  It’s clear that Jonah has made a thorough and thoughtful study of the political history of the 1980s.

It reminds me of the liberal obsession in the 1980s with getting inner-city gangs to settle their differences with break-dance competitions. If only Muqtada Sadr would moonwalk to peace!

Okay, he’s made a thorough and thoughtful study of the plot of Breakin’ 2:  Electric Boogaloo!

Last night, Bush finally acknowledged what Americans already knew: The war has not gone well.

So if, after screwing up, and after everybody else has already agreed that you’ve screwed up, you’re the last guy to actually admit that you screwed up, that too is a definition of moral courage.  Damn, we’re gonna need one whole thesaurus just for this entry.

But he also acknowledged what few Democrats are willing to admit: If we leave — i.e. lose — it will be a disaster, a geostrategic calamity for the United States and quite possibly a genocidal one for the Iraqis.

The only rational course:  Continue screwing up!  Otherwise, we might look incompetent.

It’s long since forgotten, but perhaps the chief moral argument against the Iraq war in 2003 was that it would create an enormous humanitarian crisis in the form of refugees spilling over the borders, which in turn would destabilize the region. That didn’t happen.

Right.  If you ignore the 2 million Iraqis who have already fled the country.

Bush declared last night that “victory will not look like the ones our fathers and grandfathers achieved. There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship”

To quote Doghouse Riley, “Right. This one’ll be on an aircraft carrier, and it’ll come at the beginning instead of the end.”

Bush came up with the “surge” plan. Will it work? Nobody knows.

But you know a war plan is serious when it has the same probability of success as hitting 33 black in roulette.

But the one thing the American people know about George W. Bush is that he wants to win the war. What the Democrats believe is anybody’s guess.

Well, maybe you have to guess, Jonah, but for me, the Democrats’ message is coming in loud and clear.  They want me to drink more Ovaltine.

Posted by scott on Thursday, January 11th, 2007 at 8:21 pm.

23 Responses to “Bush Beaten by Drunken Beauty Queen”

Aughhhh! My hometown paper! The Doughy Pantload! I die! I die once again!
By the way, coming from youse two, the expression “too dumb to paper train” takes on real meaning. You two KNOW. You take in and nurture stray animals. You do not, however, give them well-paid jobs extruding nationally syndicated dreckola.
Community standards in print journalism being where they’ve fallen (thrown from the top of Times-Mirror Plaza, more likely), we Constant Readers owe you a debt of gratitude.

Left by Mrs. Tarquin Biscuitbarrel on January 11th, 2007

Bush is “deluding himself” to a degree not seen since the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Except the President is not personally getting hacked to pieces – the dismembered knight is simply his employee, so it’s fairly easy for Bush to declare “It’s just a flesh wound!” each time blood geysers from a rudely truncated stump.
Yup. That pretty much covers it. I say we give Miss USA a shot at being president. It’s not like she could be *worse* at it.

Left by D. Sidhe on January 11th, 2007

So Jonah says we have to man up and go Full Metal Pantload?

Left by Spalpeen Hammer on January 11th, 2007

LA Times, LA Times, why hast thou forsaken me and given Doughy Pantload a job?
Scott, once again you’ve proven why you and SZ are some of the best bloggers around-you eviscerate rightwingnutcakes right and left. In the words of Lola Heatherton (SCTV): “I love YOU, World O’ Crap! I want to BEAR your CHILDREN!”
Hmmm, is it too late to nominate THIS post for a Koufax?

Left by maryc on January 11th, 2007

Mrs. B, believe me, I share your despair over the decline of the LAT. There was a time when Yellow Journalism made, at the very least, for a lively paper. Now it just seems to indicate “an hastily improvised surrogate for Depends.”
By the way, coming from youse two, the expression “too dumb to paper train” takes on real meaning. You two KNOW.
I appreciate the kind words, but s.z. is the sole Beast Whisperer around here. I freely admit that I could never cope with her Clyde Beatty-sized menagerie; it’s all I can do to peacefully co-exist with the two cats who insist on sharing the apartment.

Left by scott on January 11th, 2007

The only way to stomach a Jonah Goldberg “movement” is with your expert analysis. This was probably the funniest and most-tragic of all.
Thank you.

Left by Marco on January 11th, 2007

LA Times, LA Times, why hast thou forsaken me and given Doughy Pantload a job?

It could be worse–Time Magazine just hired Bill Kristol. Yecch.

AMERICANS ARE torn between two irreconcilable positions on the Iraq war. Some want the war to be a success — variously defined — and some want the war to be over.

Aaaand, in his first couple o’ sentences… Jonah totally loses me. *sigh* “(I)rreconcilable positions”… wha? [shakes head] Gah-it’s still there! So… according to Jonah… if we win… then, we can’t leave‽‽
And, if we lose… then, we get to leave?
OK. Yeah. I can live with losing then. Yup.

Left by Marq on January 12th, 2007

I don’t think, maryc, that it’s too late to nominate this one – it certainly is a contender! Scott, Scott, Scott – will you marry me? Okay, never mind, but DAMN, you guys are good!!

Left by BeginningToWonder on January 12th, 2007

and grunted out another steamy pile of ruminations.
so does that make him a “cud stud?”

Left by preznit giv me turkee on January 12th, 2007

Y’know, I’ve set aside a jar of formaldehyde on the off chance I’ll live long enough to see his brain offered on eBay.
We need to appreciate Jonah for what he is: a paragon of wingnut educational impulses dating to the early 60s. It’s not just that he’s remarkably lazy; it’s that this laziness is completely in the service of that transplanted Soviet Heroic school of history, public affairs, and the Arts which produces nothing but so infects our public discourse that our school history texts are one-third bunkum and half omission. Seriously. It’s enough for Jonah that he can recap the pro-Vietnam war arguments he was drilled on as a child for him to claim to be offering us lessons from History. Odds are good he’ll deliver an obsequy or two to the well-respected Martin in the next few days, but he has less understanding of the Civil Rights Movement than you could teach a parrot. Everything’s a moral outrage because that’s the single, unfletched arrow in his quill, unless you count that light sabre with the dead AAAs.
If I had demonstrated at 13 the sort of unrestrained ignorance of WWII, or the Great Depression (both further from me than the 60s, let alone the 80s, are from Jonah) that the muddle-aged Goldberg does about events in his recent past I’d have flunked out of junior high.

Left by Doghouse Riley on January 12th, 2007

Uh, quiver.

Left by Doghouse Riley on January 12th, 2007

Y’know, I’ve set aside a jar of formaldehyde on the off chance I’ll live long enough to see his brain offered on eBay.
baby food size?

Left by preznit giv me turkee on January 12th, 2007

Jonah Goldberg may well be the stupidest man working in letters in modern America. Scott’s analysis is spot-on, but I feel there are a few more points to be made:
“It’s long since forgotten, but perhaps the chief moral argument against the Iraq war in 2003 was that it would create an enormous humanitarian crisis in the form of refugees spilling over the borders, which in turn would destabilize the region. That didn’t happen.”
Hard as it may be, let’s ignore the fact that Jonah is castigating the left for a completely accurate prediction.
Instead, let’s focus on another thing you historians out there might remember from the beginning of the war: Bush claimed the war was neccesary because Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction he might use on American targets.
While going to war might solve other problems, like toppling an evil dictator, or getting us more oil, it was widely agreed that these were not, in and of theselves, sufficient reason to go to war. They were just icing on the cake; the delicious coconut flavored cake involved stopping Husseing from using weapons of mass destruction on us.
So, we might simply state the primary objective of the Iraq war thusly:
Remove Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi Government’s capability to attack the United States using weapons of mass destruction.
It should be clear that not only have we met that objective, we have met it as thouroughly as could ever be hoped.
A Phyrric victory to be sure, but a victory nonetheless.
So, obviously Jonah’s not working off of pre-war standards of victory. But what is he working off of?
Well, I believe Marq got it exactly right:
“But he also acknowledged what few Democrats are willing to admit: If we leave — i.e. lose — it will be a disaster, a geostrategic calamity for the United States and quite possibly a genocidal one for the Iraqis.”
According to Merriam-Webster online, “i.e.” simply means “that is”.
Golberg is explicitly stating that “leaving Iraq” is synonymous with “losing”.
Since “winning” is the opposite of “losing” and Goldberg defines losing as “leaving”, we can assume that winning can be defined as the opposite of leaving, to wit, staying.
So, yes, Marq, Goldberg defines “winning in Iraq” as maintaining an American troop pressence there indefinately.

Left by Christopher on January 12th, 2007

Sadly, I am reminded of Zapp Brannigan from Futurama: “You see, Killbots have a preset kill limit. Knowing their weakness, I sent wave after wave of my own men at them, until they reached their limit and shut down.” And he won a medal for that, as I suspect he would have under the current US government.

Left by Charlotte Smith on January 12th, 2007

…[Bush's] plan may not work, but he at least has done the nation the courtesy of saying what his position is, despite an antagonistic political establishment and a hostile public.
Someone please remind this ass that he works for that “hostile public.” He is there in that big white house at our bidding (unfortunately) and he should do it. There is a certain point in time when it is no longer a sign of strength to ‘stay to course’ but an indication that your grasp of reality is not only tenuous, but slipping faster than Yosemite Sam on a banana peel.
But then we all knew that. It seems the 28% who doesn’t all have columns.

Left by punkinsmom on January 12th, 2007

It reminds me of the liberal obsession in the 1980s with getting inner-city gangs to settle their differences with break-dance competitions.
Boy, those were the days. The rubber bracelets, the headbands… The repercussion-less sodomy… the alternate justice system based on breakdance… In the name of Steven Biko, whatever happened to the liberal obsessions of the ’80s?

Left by FlipYrWhig on January 13th, 2007

“Y’know, I’ve set aside a jar of formaldehyde on the off chance I’ll live long enough to see his brain offered on eBay.”
‘baby food size?’
:::SHAKES FIST VAGUELY WESTWARD:::
DAMN YOU, PREZNIT!!!!!!
That was the first fucking thing that entered my mind, but noooooooooooo, you had to be here FIRST!
I’m going to have to find a payphone, ’cause the Mormons have Caller ID now…
*sigh*
OT, completely, but blogwhoring nonetheless:
Speaking of people who do wonderful, awe-inspiring things to help homeless critters, please visit these nice people and do what you can:
http://www.cathaven.org/index.htm
Need more of a reason?
http://anntichristscoulter.blogspot.com/2007/01/can-yall-bear-another-cat-post.html
/end blogwhoring
//saving quarters for payphones

Left by Anntichrist S. Coulter on January 13th, 2007

Whig, I was just gonna rant about what a historically ignorant fuckwit Jonah is, but I will never be the dry wit that you are. Thank you.

Left by D. Sidhe on January 13th, 2007

Bush and the conservative media are positioning themselves to blame any future disastrous outcome in Iraq not on the warmongers who started this tragedy, but on the new Congress that’s trying to find a way to dismount from the tiger that shouldn’t have been saddled in the first place.
Reminds me of another Python character, namely Otto from “A Fish Called Wanda”, the retired CIA assassin (played brilliantly by Kevin Kline) who careens around London’s narrow streets crashing into other cars–and at each fender-bender leans out his window, yells “Ass-HOOOOLE!!”, and drives off without a second thought.
We all made fun of Haig at Reagan’s attempted assassination yelling “I’m in charge here” but these guys are expressing the opposite sentiment.

Left by trashfire on January 13th, 2007

Or was his speech Smoke & Mirrors, only the Smoke is thin and smells awful (like New York last week), the mirrors are from a Funhouse, and broken. The magicians are stumblebums.

Left by Kathy on January 13th, 2007

preznit giv me turkee asketh, of scott’s Words o’Brilliance:
” … and grunted out another steamy pile of ruminations.”
so does that make him a “cud stud?”
To which saith I:
More like a turd bird, I should think. You know the kind – pecking through each steaming lump for nuggets o’goodness.

Left by thepoliticalcat on January 13th, 2007

Thx, D. I probably should have cited the period’s cause celebre, the case of Fresh v. Fly.

Left by FlipYrWhig on January 13th, 2007

Since I’m planning to get the book, I followed the Little Nemo link. And you can look inside the book! Brilliant!
Um.
It lets you look at the cover and the index. That’s what we call Jonah Goldberg brilliant!

Left by Kip W on January 16th, 2007

The Winter of His Discontent

While sitting in his office with the door closed, fantasizing about his new intern bringing him a late night pizza and then flashing her thong, Jonah cast about for an insight on the post-election landscape, and settled on this:


Yes, after the shellacking Jonah’s team received at the polls, partly from angry Latinos and blacks, he concludes that the best way for the Republicans to shed their image as the party of white privilege is to attack affirmative action.

Really. He does. Because like the criminal who always returns to the scene of the crime, pundits like Jonah — who are all as hollow as a cheap chocolate Easter bunny — invariably return to the same bankrupt themes. This week, it’s “just as water always finds its own level, blacks should also be allowed to stagnate and breed mosquitos if they ever hope to graduate from law school.” To buttress his argument, Jonah quotes Peter Kirsanow, a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, and a man who cares so deeply about the subject that he testified in favor of Sam Alito’s nomination to the Supreme Court, and warned Arab-Americans at a meeting in Detroit that if terrorists launch another successful attack on American soil, “and they come from the same ethnic group that attacked the World Trade Center, you can forget about civil rights.”

So basically, Civil Rights Commissioner Kirsanow is Edward G. Robinson in The Ten Commandments, tauting Charleton Heston’s Moses, “Where’s your Bill of Rights now?” Or, maybe he’s just incredibly bad at winning friends and influencing people, as Max Blumenthal hinted when he wrote in the Huffington Post:

Kirsanow continued by urging his [Arab-American] audience to drop their opposition to the Patriot Act. After all, he said, if Arabs attack the U.S. again, “not too many people will be crying in their beer if there are more detentions, more stops, more profiling.”

If this represents the quality of “sources” quoted in Jonah’s “book,” then I just might have to load up on G-strings and French cut briefs and take the intern job myself; because the footnotes promise to be a hilarious wonderland of verdant skies, pink unicorns, and Ann Coulter-shaped toadstools.  But in all fairness, Jonah doesn’t need some political appointee with the diplomatic finesse of John Bolton to make his points vapid and self-contradicting; he can handle that himself, thank you very much:

Today’s diversity doctrine was contrived as a means of making racial preferences permanent.

As opposed to, say, evolving as a means of maintaining social homeostasis in a country which has traditionally benefited from foreign cultural influences, and which is undergoing tectonic shifts in demographics.  Nah, I’m sure Jonah’s right, and the whole thing is just a scam designed to keep Jesse Jackson in zoot suits.

After all, affirmative action was intended as a temporary remedy for the tragic mistreatment of blacks. But as affirmative action drifted into racial preferences, it became constitutionally suspect because racial preferences are by definition discriminatory. If I give extra credit to Joe because he’s black, I’m making things just that much harder for Tom because he’s white.

Man, it sucks being white.  Mostly it just grinds you down; it’s exhausting, all the extra effort you have to expend just to perform some simple, ordinary, everyday task, like pledging Skull & Bones, or applying for a job at Dean Witter, or getting elected to Congress.  You look around and what do you see?  Nothing but other white faces!  The competition is frigging ridiculous!  No wonder we all look the same to them.  You gotta pity that poor bastard Tom, not having the luck and foresight to be born a poor black child.

When the University of Michigan’s admissions policies were being reviewed by the Supreme Court, former school president Lee Bollinger explained that diversity was as “as essential as the study of the Middle Ages, of international politics and of Shakespeare” because exposure to people of different hues lies at the core of the educational experience. That’s another way of saying that racial preferences are forever, just like the timeless works of the immortal bard. That business about redressing past discrimination against blacks is no longer the name of the game.

Emphasis mine.  So, Jonah gets to define “diversity “in his own Humpty Dumptian way, then when the rest of the world acts as though that word might have another, more generally accepted meaning, he’s allowed to get huffy and accuse them of being deceitful, ’cause his Mom said he was!  Hm.  What is the name of that game?
Oh.  That’s right.  Calvinball.

There was a time when condescension, discrimination, arrogant social engineering along racial lines and the like were dubbed racism. And, to paraphrase Shakespeare, racism by any other name still stinks.

And if I had to pick a Shakespearan character whom Jonah most reminded me of, it would probably be Richard III; not because of his lousy posture, but because, like the Duke of Gloucester, Jonah is apparently, “deformed, unfinished, sent before [his] time into this breathing world, scarce half made up.”  In other words, he’s as underdone as the Pillbury Doughboy, and should crawl back into the Bronson Canyon Cave-like birth canal of his mother and not come out again until he grows a soul.
Or better yet, he should read this brief, but brilliant post by Doghouse Riley.  SFW*.  NSFtS**.

*Safe For Work.
**Not Safe For the Soulless.

Posted by scott on Sunday, November 19th, 2006 at 2:53 pm.

So Lucianne Goldberg’s son is lashing out against the unfairness of affirmative action?
At least Richard III did his own dirty work to become king.

Left by PlusDistance on November 19th, 2006

While affirmitive is a double-edged sword, it’s only a short-term answer. If we could improve the conditions of poor, Black neighborhood and eliminate racism (good luck with that), there’d be less need for it.

Left by Yaoi Huntress Earth on November 19th, 2006

And if people like Jonah Goldberg could recognize that need they might be able to write intelligent commentary on the subject. (note I don’t say people such as Jonah.
It doesn’t matter whether there’s anything filling the slot where Goldberg’s conscience should be. Anyone with the least familiarity with the history of racism and sexism in this country would not prop up the “reverse discrimination” argument just because some white kid suffers a (theoretical) minor disappointment. We can find a trillion bucks to kill us some brown people, but making an effort to correct 400 years of vile mistreatment of minorities on this continent, like providing adequate medical care, nutrition, or competitive schools is anathema, because somebody, somewhere might get something he doesn’t deserve.

Left by Doghouse Riley on November 19th, 2006

Michelle Malkin and Glenn Beck should remind Jonah that white people are becoming a minority in this country and soon he’ll be able to benefit from affirmative action.
(Man, having that sentence in my brain even long enough to type it killed thousands of cells.)

Left by D. Sidhe on November 20th, 2006

because somebody, somewhere might get something he doesn’t deserve.

Like nobody does.
Oh, wait…
You were talking about white folks! Oops.

Left by Marq on November 20th, 2006

OK, since nobody seems willing to go… there, I guess I gots ta! This is all everyone else’s fault, damn it, so blame yourself. Or, each other. Feh.
Y’know, if this awful affirmative action stuff keeps up, some day black men will be able to claim “a certain sexual confidence befitting a former cheerleader at Ole Miss.”
Gah. Now I must go blow my brains out.
.
(not really, but GAAAAAAAAHH!!1!!)

Left by Marq on November 20th, 2006

Yes, Marq, that elusive, “certain sexual confidence” was not available to Jonah Goldberg, since he was one of the first male students at Goucher College.
To know that my hometown newspaper kicked out Robert Scheer in favor of the Doughy Pantload makes me want to gouge out my eyes with a ballpoint pen.

Left by Mrs. Tarquin Biscuitbarrel on November 20th, 2006

Ah, nothing like a lazy writer invoking “Shakespeare” as his source of instant pseudo-moral authority.
Pantload as Richard III? I see him more as Dogberry–a clown absurdly puffed up with delusional self-importance, and to everyone else, clearly “an ass.”

Left by jp on November 20th, 2006

Well, jp, it’s a good choice: Jonah is the dog’s berries. But the Constable is loveable in his incompetence, holds a position of authority, and probably got that on his own merits. So my choice is Le Beau, from As You Like It: the hereditary sycophant, full of wind and a lover of wrestling, which matches well with Jonah’s sci-fi fanboy pursuits. Though he does commit an act of conscience towards the end which would have to be ignored.

Left by Doghouse Riley on November 20th, 2006

Stop slagging on Jonah – he’s down with the bruthas. Don’t you remember his ground-breaking (or was that wind-breaking) album from the ’90s, Fear of a Black Pantload?

Left by Spalpeen Hammer on November 20th, 2006

Shakespeare’s Richard III is a caricature — much like a biography of Bill Clinton written by The Dick Cheney. But actually, that makes comparing Jonah to him much better than if you compared Jonah to the real Richard III. Cartoon characters deserve each other.
More seriously: why does Jonah think that a couple of decades of half-assed attempts to redress injustice to black people, fought every step of the way by him & his ilk, mean that affirmative action has totally succeeded and isn’t needed any more?

Left by Tehanu on November 21st, 2006

If i’ve said it once, I’ve said it a hundred times, if Jonah is the result of how she was gonna use it, God should have never given Lucianne Goldberg a uterus

Left by The Crapture on November 21st, 2006

Let’s hope Lyndon Bane(s) Johnson Junior can overcome the wicked, immoral oppression that is holding back so many deserving krackers. Poor thing, born on third base and thinks he hit a triple – not that a defibulator would get him to home plate.

Left by TF-MA on November 22nd, 2006

Crapture, if it’s any consolation, I’m sure popping that giant load of nothing was extremely painful for her.

Left by Bill S on November 22nd, 2006

GAAAAHHHH!!1!1!!!!! Mental image!!!!1!! Mental image!1!!!1!! GAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!1!!

Left by Marq on November 23rd, 2006

Being born was no picnic for Jonah either. It took years for those head-to-foot tooth scratches to fade.

Left by Kip W on November 24th, 2006

Speaking of Jonah...

… Here’s a golden opportunity to write his book for him (and for very little pay)!  But just think how impressive your internship with Jonah “My Mom Got Me The NRO Gig” Goldberg will look on your resume.  (That is, assuming that the book he’s soliciting help with isn’t ”The Old World Adventures of Trent Lott, Sexy Ole Miss Cheerleader.”)

Help Wanted [Jonah Goldberg]
I’m gonna need a meticulous, smart, diligent intern/assistant type to help me with the house-cleaning on my manuscript. In particular, I need someone to help get my copious footnotes and the like in order. There will also be some serious research-related stuff to do as we head into galley mode.  It would be best if he or she — or conceivably it — went to school or worked in the DC area so we could meet from time to time. I haven’t thought through the money question, but you can be assured it won’t be lavish. But what’s filthy lucre compared to a glowing mention in the acknowledgements and my eternal gratitude? Anyway, anybody interested in said gig should send an email with appropriate info (resume, experience, dancing ability etc) to JonahResearch@aol.com.  Posted at 12:51 PM

Yes, all you have to do for that acknowledgment in this fine Regnary (if he’s lucky) publication will be to organize the blegged footnotes, do research (possibly via blegs), and help Jonah come up with the appropriate Simpsons references on the burning issue of liberal fascism.

So, if you happen to need a really bad job (possibly because you’re doing research for your “The Office” script), today may be your lucky day!

Posted by s.z. on Friday, November 17th, 2006 at 5:39 pm.

Jonah? Research?
That doesn’t sound right.

Left by TC on November 17th, 2006

Oh boy, I always wanted to be a slave to a spoiled idiot! Will I get to do all his errands too?

Left by Hysterical Woman on November 17th, 2006

So Jonah managed to write a book despite having his “copius” research in disarray. Sounds like a true work of scholarship.
Advertising for an intern is pretty smart, though. I’m sure the going rate for an intern is a whole lot less than the fee that a “manuscript doctor” would charge.

Left by Zeno on November 17th, 2006

Dancing ability?
Was Jonah THAT disappointed in Tucker’s performance on Dancing With The Scars?

Left by actor212 on November 17th, 2006

I suspect that the meagerly-paid ‘intern’ will, in fact, be writing the damned book, as I do not believe that Jonah’s mythical manuscript exists.

Left by Gentlewoman on November 17th, 2006

“I’m gonna need a meticulous, smart, diligent intern/ assistant type to help me with the house-cleaning on my manuscript.”
I take it that he needs someone to clean out his verbal septic system

Left by tomg on November 17th, 2006

Oh, I forgot. Jonah, just make sure that the person – or it – you hire knows “Conjunction Function.” You seem to have a bit of a problem with parallel construction.

Left by tomg on November 17th, 2006

Do you suppose Jonah will get mad if his “assistant” points out that many all of his assertions are, in fact, lies?

Left by Marq on November 18th, 2006

You know–as well as his claims, his so-called “facts,” his statements, and pretty much everything else in the book. I’m thinking, “Yesh.”

Left by Marq on November 18th, 2006

Could I do better than “Bob the Bob-tailed Bobcat?” Lately I’ve been trying to write a Regency Romance, but I might put it aside for J.

Left by Kathy on November 18th, 2006

I do not believe that Jonah’s mythical manuscript exists.
Same here. In fact, I’d go so far as to suggest that Jonah’s “copious footnotes” (I’m visualizing a shoebox full of clippings) are pretty much all that exists of his “book” other than the kewl Photoshopped cover. Pushing back the release date was a dead giveaway.

Left by Realist on November 19th, 2006

Mad's Look on the Lighter Side of WTF?

In his LA Times column today, Jonah Goldberg objects to the decision by Senate Republicans to brew up a pot of tanna leaf tea and resurrect Trent Lott. Not because Lott implicitly endorsed the pro-segregation platform of Strom Thurmond’s Dixiecrat party, or because he has well-documented ties to white supremacist organizations. No, it’s because of…um…

Hm. Actually, I’m not sure what Jonah’s gripe is, because he spends the majority of his column absolving Lott of racism. I think it’s maybe the Senator’s demonstrated willingness to at least consider compromising with the opposition (a trait which also did not endear Lott to the White House), or possibly it’s his hair. In other words, it’s a typical Goldbergian meringue, in which Chef Jonah takes his gleaming whisk of words and attempts to beat a bowlful of eggs, poker chips, brake fluid, and aquarium gravel into stiff peaks.

So why even bring it up? Only because it contains the single greatest sentence to appear in the English language ever! I’m not given to hyperbole, but you could take an infinite number of monkeys filled with an infinite amount of mescaline and sit them down at an infinite number of word processors, and never produce a non sequitur as jarring as this:

Nobody disputes that Lott could be a great minority whip. He was elected precisely because he has the skills a minority whip needs: an intimate knowledge of the institution, and the ability to shake down colleagues for votes. Lott is detail oriented, collegial with an Old World gentility — as well as a certain sexual confidence befitting a former cheerleader at Ole Miss.

Emphasis mine.  Dementia Jonah’s.  And although I freely admit that when I was in school, I wanted to sleep with the cheerleaders, it was largely because — amongst the entire student body — they bore the least resemblance to Trent Lott!

Anyway, sorry about exposing you to that.  But since I can never hope to ever get that sentence out of my mind, I’m afraid I have no recourse but to spread it around until it becomes a pandemic, at which point sufficient resources may be allocated to find a cure.

Posted by scott on Thursday, November 16th, 2006 at 6:41 pm.

as well as a certain sexual confidence befitting a former cheerleader at Ole Miss.
Maybe this is some kind of wingnut code, like Ben Domenech’s Red Dawn reference.

Left by J— on November 16th, 2006

Oh…my…sweet lordy gordy. That’s just…maybe he just has Lott confused with somebody else? Or he got confused about what a “minority whip” was, and thought it involved leather?
Great, see what you made do-I’m trying to think like Jonah. Nobody should ever have to do that. Thanks a lot, Scott.

Left by Bill S on November 16th, 2006

as well as a certain sexual confidence befitting a former cheerleader at Ole Miss.
***
But, if it’s phrased as a question, it makes a wonderful koan.

Left by K. Ron Silkwood on November 16th, 2006

Hey, George W was a cheerleader, and therefore in Republicanland, it must be a sexy, confident, virile, manly thing to be, reality be damned.
My high school had a male cheerleader for one game, at which he was laughed off the field and never seen again. I think this new hagiography may be a tough sell for the wingnutters.

Left by sophronia on November 16th, 2006

1. What is Goldberg’s point in this column?
a) Trent Lott may or may not be racist
b) Being a male cheerleader builds sexual confidence
c) No one knows what a minority whip does, unless Trent Lott happens to be one
d) Jonah had no point, but had to write something to fill up a 300 word column

Left by Mark S. on November 17th, 2006

I find it delightful that this unrepentant racist will soon have the title “Minority Whip” attached to his name in every article mentioning him.

Left by Veritas78 on November 17th, 2006

The “R” in Republican is for “Reliably Racist.” Thank Yahweh the R’s put the Klansman over Lamar Alexander by one vote for “whipper of the minority.” Keeps reminding us all of their inbred confederate, slave-holding, lynching heritage. And that they’re PROUD OF IT.
South’s gonna go it agin’.
Lose then Surrender at Appomattox Court House.

Left by Douglas Watts on November 17th, 2006

Shorter Pantload: it’s fine for the GOP to keep Lott around, but he shouldn’t be seen in public.

Left by melior on November 17th, 2006

WHAT.
No, seriously. WHAT.

Left by Jack of None on November 17th, 2006

You know, the next time Jonah has a looming deadline and nothing of any interest to say, even by his standards, he should just go with the “And what is the deal with these flight attendants” thing.
The sad thing is, it’s almost possible he was making yet another of his deeply lame jokes. Can we get him a student loan for Clown College? It might help. Can’t hurt.

Left by D. Sidhe on November 17th, 2006

Don’t insult clowns, D. Sidhe. My mom actually took a college course to become a clown, and got work entertaining a kids’ parties. (She had a regular day job at a grocery store. It paid for the course, and she’d dress up for store events.)My dad (and the rest of us) joked about it, but she actually did make good money from it, and as long as she was enjoying it, we didn’t really mind, although there were a couple times she picked me up from work in costume. She’s in her 70′s now and no longer does it-I think when she retired from her regular job and moved to Florida, she retired from clowning as well.
Jonah would never make it as a clown. My mom is a naturally friendly, social person, and in or out of costume,an approachable one. Jonah seems socially retarded-he’d probably creep out small children. He does it to adults WITHOUT a clown nose.

Left by Bill S on November 17th, 2006

You know, the whole Foley/Haggard deal is starting to look less like an aberration and more like business as usual for today’s GOP all the time.
Somebody might want to let Jonah know he isn’t helping things any by writing odes on how sexy male cheerleaders are.

Left by Realist on November 17th, 2006

Actually, it was an attempt at a Simpsons joke, knowing how much Jonah digs that sort of thing. I have to say, there are moments when I’m almost fond of hapless, helpless Jonah. And then I remember, for example, how he felt that poor Katrina victims didn’t really, like, suffer too bad or anything, cause, it’s not like they really had a lot of *good* stuff that got ruined, right? And then I loathe him again.

Left by D. Sidhe on November 17th, 2006

Lott is detail oriented, collegial with an Old World gentility — as well as a certain sexual confidence befitting a former cheerleader at Ole Miss

Why do the words “photoshop opportunity” suddenly leap to mind?
Immediately followed by “OMFG, NSFW! NSFW!”

Left by Satan luvvs Repugs on November 17th, 2006

This is the funniest goddam blog in the world – flat out!

Left by BeginningToWonder on November 17th, 2006

“Lott is detail oriented, collegial with an Old World gentility — as well as a certain sexual confidence befitting a former cheerleader at Ole Miss.”
Jeezus Christ, Jonah. The construction should be “and has,” not “as well as.” It reads as though you were on one train of “thought” and then you drifted away and visualized Trent Lott in his cheerleader outfit.
Well, if you have problems like that again, just remember:
Conjunction Junction, what’s your function?
Hooking up words and phrases and clauses.
Conjunction Junction, how’s that function?
I got three favorite cars
That get most of my job done.
Conjunction Junction, what’s their function?
I got “and”, “but”, and “or”,
They’ll get you pretty far.
“And”:
That’s an additive, like “this and that”.
If I were Jonah, I would keep away from Pastor Swank.
Has Jonah been taking grammar lessons from the Pastor Swank.

Left by tomg on November 17th, 2006

My high school had a male cheerleader for one game, at which he was laughed off the field and never seen again. I think this new hagiography may be a tough sell for the wingnutters.
My high school had one guy who really, really wanted to be a male cheerleader, but he was also the star soccer player so they made him be that guy on the football team who kicks the ball.
I’m not sure if that was really because they always made the best soccer player kick the football, or if they were trying to keep him from gaying up the rest of the athletic program. I guess we won’t know until a boy with no athletic talent attempts to joing the fall cheerleading squad. On the other hand, it’s a good way to spend a lot of time with a group of girls pre-selected for vapidity and hotness. What guy wouldn’t want to give that a shot?

Left by Kyso K on November 17th, 2006

tomg, “Keep away from Pastor Swank” is good advice for ANYONE, not just Jonah Who Swallowed The Whale.

Left by Bill S on November 17th, 2006

What is it with Fudgie the Whale and male cheerleaders?

Left by actor212 on November 17th, 2006

I didn’t think it was possible for Jonah to write anything stupider than the ‘Bush should dress up in a loincloth and kill and skin a bear with a knife’ column.
I was wrong. I say he’s now a shoo-in for the Conservative Welfare Queen title this year.

Left by Gentlewoman on November 17th, 2006

Never underestimate how stupid Jonah can get, Gentlewoman.

Left by Bill S on November 17th, 2006

“an Old World gentility”
– ???
This guy needs to spend more time talking with Germans, or French persons. That would soon cure him of putting ‘Old World’ and ‘gentility’ into the same sentence.

Left by herr doktor bimler on November 17th, 2006

I just… Oh my! I had this…
Trent Lott and GWB! and male-cheerleading!
So I just mentally took off and there was a frantic slap-scratching fight, and sexual confidence and even testoserone had nothing to do with it.
And I was just over at SadlyNo lecturing everyone about sexual prejudices. Here’s the hair-brush; somebody spank me!

Left by Miss Emily on November 18th, 2006

That is so not my department, Miss Em.
Scott, how could you‽ (I lurve my interrobang!) Is that any way to dissuade suicidal thoughts? My anti-depressants haven’t kicked in yet, and that mental image is so… wrong. Also, I… wait a sec…
[bbBBBbblllLaaAArrrRrFFFf!!!]
OOooooh. Ick. OK, Trenty isn’t the physically ugliest man in Congress, but when it comes to personality, yikes. He’s right up there. Still, if I had to blow him or Sensenbrenner (ew! ew! ew! ew! ew! ew! ew! ew! ew! ew! ew! ew! ew!), Wisconsin would lose! But, I wouldn’t be happy about it, either way!
Gah!

Left by Marq on November 18th, 2006

I shoulda known better than to read this after dinner. Well, I’m not a “Hungry Man” anymore.

Left by Marq on November 18th, 2006

Not to pile on, but I believe he needs to hyphenate “detail-oriented” as well

Left by reidmc on November 19th, 2006

No, actually, because it’s not before a noun.

Left by Anne on November 21st, 2006